First Flight Impressions of the Plus

[Ty Pilot]

I cannot figure out what's causing your battery drain on the controller...I flew 6 batteries and had 64% battery left on the controller I flew three more after a couple hours of not flying which left me with 47%. Perhaps the amount of flying time I've put in is making my battery on the controller more extensible. Regarding folders I had about 35 of them yesterday I wish you would come over and sort them out for me...they are a complete disaster when I'm backing up all the data to other drives or archiving them into a Lightroom library. But as you said this is contingent upon peoples workflow...I sometimes shoot 5 batteries on exact same subject when doing a video story...I almost never shoot one battery on anything since I want to cover all possibilities once I get to editing. For the way I'm used to dealing with large volumes of files this filing systems atrocious.

I dunno either maybe it will get a little better with use and maybe my particular battery is bad from the manufacture but its okay for now. I hear what you are saying for the file thing, maybe there will be a fix or a update that would allow us to choose the method we prefer - but that would make too much sense. Curious MickeyBoo, when you shoot five batteries - is this the stock Plus and the 480 batteries? I have not as yet tried the 480 batteries in mine. And if you have what are the percentages for start, low battery and so forth? Oh, and I would be glad to sort through you files for you I just have to figure out a way to get to Iceland without my wife knowing, she so wants to go there, especially after I showed here a couple of your pics.

 

[rdonson]

I’m wondering how stable the H+ is closer to the ground. For example a cinematic approach to a subject at 3-6’ off the ground at a slow or modest speed then go up.

 

[Mickeyboo]

I’m wondering how stable the H+ is closer to the ground. For example a cinematic approach to a subject at 3-6’ off the ground at a slow or modest speed then go up.

You will soon see the answer to that although when you fly that low with the H+ you now get irritating warmings. Most of the time I fly pretty low, I'm not much of a map mariner when it comes to flying.

 

[Mickeyboo]

I dunno either maybe it will get a little better with use and maybe my particular battery is bad from the manufacture but its okay for now. I hear what you are saying for the file thing, maybe there will be a fix or a update that would allow us to choose the method we prefer - but that would make too much sense. Curious MickeyBoo, when you shoot five batteries - is this the stock Plus and the 480 batteries? I have not as yet tried the 480 batteries in mine. And if you have what are the percentages for start, low battery and so forth? Oh, and I would be glad to sort through you files for you I just have to figure out a way to get to Iceland without my wife knowing, she so wants to go there, especially after I showed here a couple of your pics.

I'm flying the two batteries which came with the H+ and 4 of the 6300 mAh batteries which Pat has mentioned before which give me 2/3 to 3/4 (not formally measured, just guesstimate) the flying time of the one's which came with the H+. When I check their voltage it's 100 % but drops after take off to low 90% reading, they have worked fine for not having any more of the stock Yuneec H+ available before I left. The 6300 mAh last longer than stock H batteries so that's why I brought them instead of Yuneec H. They have flown absolutely flawlessly just for a shorter period of time of course. Iceland is a great place to fly but you now need permits for National Park flying which is just about the only place I fly. If anyone wants to know more about how to obtain the permits I'll be happy to fill them in on the process. Most of my flying is done from 3:00 am to 6:00 am in the morning so that I don't have to deal with any people distracting me given the heavy tourist traffic in summer time....another reason I usually come in the winter.

 

[Ty Pilot]

I’m wondering how stable the H+ is closer to the ground. For example a cinematic approach to a subject at 3-6’ off the ground at a slow or modest speed then go up.

This is the kind of stuff I have been working to get with the 480 but I never really felt it was quite there. The Plus on the other hand is very good, and at times stunningly so. I have done some low altitude runs and close in moves that will give you the answers you seek. I hope to get something together later this week; I am just slammed with work at the moment - probably because I have neglected my duties since getting the Plus but every time I dive into the 'folder pool' I am seeing glimpses of a very promising camera platform.

 

[Ty Pilot]

Iceland is a great place to fly but you now need permits for National Park flying which is just about the only place I fly. If anyone wants to know more about how to obtain the permits I'll be happy to fill them in on the process. Most of my flying is done from 3:00 am to 6:00 am in the morning so that I don't have to deal with any people distracting me given the heavy tourist traffic in summer time....another reason I usually come in the winter.

I would like to know more, lets talk when you get back.

 

[Mickeyboo]

I would like to know more, lets talk when you get back.

I'll give you a shout when I return...

 

[Barton]

Just for grins I turned on the ST16S (H+ turned OFF) with the 2A charger plugged into the 1A charging circuit of the ST16S. The charge results for the ST16S were:

• start up: 100%
• 1 hr: 96%
• 2 hr: 90%
• 3 hr: 84%
• 4 hr: 78%

OK, my iMuto 30000mAh Portable Charger X6 PowerBank arrived a day early ( https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B01LYVF137/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o05_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 ) . It arrived with a 91% charge so charged it to 100%. Plugged it into the ST16S (which was at 98% charge), turned on the ST16S and the PowerBank.

I'm pleased with the following results:

Time: ST16S PowerBank
0:00 98% 100%
0:30 98 96
1:00 97 92
1:30 95 87
2:00 92 84
2:30 90 83
3:00 88 82

ST16S dropped only 10% in THREE hours and the powerbank dropped only 18%. More than enough margin for a full day mission to the boonies .

 

[Peggy]

exactly
I would also try my 50000 mah when it is delivered.
But 20 or 30% can already save a shoot

I personally don’t mess about with wires and power banks. I have 3 ST16s batteries. So much simpler. Land change aircraft battery and controller battery.
Easy life.
When last battery goes in I charge the first battery just incase I need it from the banana plug leads I made up to charge it from the A10 from my spare car battery which takes about 90 mins to give me battery 4
This in turn is equivalent to 16 aircraft batteries. For me I can’t ever see me going over 16. Infact I’ve never gone over 12 with a whole days shooting.

 

[Peggy]

I cannot figure out what's causing your battery drain on the controller...I flew 6 batteries and had 64% battery left on the controller I flew three more after a couple hours of not flying which left me with 47%. Perhaps the amount of flying time I've put in is making my battery on the controller more extensible. Regarding folders I had about 35 of them yesterday I wish you would come over and sort them out for me...they are a complete disaster when I'm backing up all the data to other drives or archiving them into a Lightroom library. But as you said this is contingent upon peoples workflow...I sometimes shoot 5 batteries on exact same subject when doing a video story...I almost never shoot one battery on anything since I want to cover all possibilities once I get to editing. For the way I'm used to dealing with large volumes of files this filing systems atrocious.

It’s a bit boring and long winded but when I have lots of folders and files from a long shoot I rename each files using batch renaming starting at 0001 if it ends up 0090 the next folder starts at 0091 and so on. When dropped onto an editing time line they are then all in order. Not ideal and Yuneec really need to sort this out but it’s a workaround that does work.

 

[YuKay]

It’s a bit boring and long winded but when I have lots of folders and files from a long shoot I rename each files using batch renaming starting at 0001 if it ends up 0090 the next folder starts at 0091 and so on. When dropped onto an editing time line they are then all in order. Not ideal and Yuneec really need to sort this out but it’s a workaround that does work.

Are all SD cards required to be formatted as FAT32? If using exFAT instead, would the file size limitation disappear?

 

[Mickeyboo]

It’s a bit boring and long winded but when I have lots of folders and files from a long shoot I rename each files using batch renaming starting at 0001 if it ends up 0090 the next folder starts at 0091 and so on. When dropped onto an editing time line they are then all in order. Not ideal and Yuneec really need to sort this out but it’s a workaround that does work.

Yes that may be helpful for some, as for the order of files shot FCP X looks for time date stamp not name to automatically order them and for stills I have Lightroom doing that as well...it's the duplication of ID numbers in every single new folder generated which is bothering me...Apple makes it easy to rename but I quite honestly have better ways to spend my time on something which was perfected years ago by still camera manufacturers Whereby the numbers automatically continue regardless of when it's shot or what card is inserted until the end user resets it. This reminds me of when I helped produced the first entirely digital newspapers with other members of the National Press Photographers Assoc. which we did almost thirty years ago. This sort of file structure in my opinion is unforgivable and demonstrates either laziness or a lack of knowledge on the part of the programmers.

 

[PatR]

My vote goes to lack of knowledge. I’ll toss in an inability to prioritize for good measure.

 

[rdonson]

My vote also goes for a future firmware update to correct this "oversight".

 

[Rubik]

Now that some of you have both the Typhoon H and H+, it would sure be interesting to see a head-to-head photo and video comparison with stock cameras. Both in the air at the same time would be best. I expect that both cameras will be set to give the best result (without significant post processing). Photos in RAW may be a good option. Thanks, in anticipation...

 

[oliver]

Frankly it is not necessary, the C23 is clearly above the CG03 + especially in photo. I compared it with the RX100 IV (photos in download on this forum) and now with the GH5. It's superb for the size and weight of the C23.

 

[Ty Pilot]

I agree @oliver that the C23 is in a completely different class than the CG03+ And while the comparison between the E90 and the CG03+ would have been a helpful tool when the 520 came out, it is a little less so now with the plus but still; I too have always wanted to see a true side by side of the (then) E90 or (now) C23 vs the CG03+.

However, that has not been done yet in a way that the viewer can see an absolute side by side comparison in every respect. In truth, the reason this has not yet been accomplished (yet) is due to the fact that these are aerial platforms and at first thought, one would think they need to be in the air to do the comparison. But that is the problem, all comparisons thus far (in the air) have attempted to show a back and forth between the two cameras when in reality they are not really shooting the exact same thing; at the same time, in the same light, at the same angle, at the same altitude and so on. To see the true comparison will take a methodical approach to display the cameras shooting the same thing precisely at the same time in the same light from the same angle. Then they need the ability to put it on the screen within the video side by side and show these two views at various settings and scales.

My first videos will not have a comparison but I may do one down the road - right now I am just stunned by this cameras imagery.

 

[Barton]

I agree @oliver that the C23 is in a completely different class than the CG03+ And while the comparison between the E90 and the CG03+ would have been a helpful tool when the 520 came out, it is a little less so now with the plus but still; I too have always wanted to see a true side by side of the (then) E90 or (now) C23 vs the CG03+.

However, that has not been done yet in a way that the viewer can see an absolute side by side comparison in every respect. In truth, the reason this has not yet been accomplished (yet) is due to the fact that these are aerial platforms and at first thought, one would think they need to be in the air to do the comparison. But that is the problem, all comparisons thus far (in the air) have attempted to show a back and forth between the two cameras when in reality they are not really shooting the exact same thing; at the same time, in the same light, at the same angle, at the same altitude and so on. To see the true comparison will take a methodical approach to display the cameras shooting the same thing precisely at the same time in the same light from the same angle. Then they need the ability to put it on the screen within the video side by side and show these two views at various settings and scales.

My first videos will not have a comparison but I may do one down the road - right now I am just stunned by this cameras imagery.

@Ty Pilot I believe that the test conditions you described were showcased in a camera review by Captain Drone for the Mavic Air and Mavic Pro (

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

) .

 

[Mickeyboo]

The desired comparison is indeed folly, first of all you're getting more than twice the resolution between the two cameras and secondly the dynamic range of the C23 makes me never want to use my H cameras again except perhaps for the 48mm lens I have on one of them for safely capturing a detailed shot from further away because of content like a prairie fire for example...but quite honestly you could take a photo from almost twice the distance using the C23 and it would still look better than the camera on the H particularly if it still has the stock lens on it. Unless you fly drones strictly for hobby use and quality doesn't really matter above the grade of "happy snaps" rest assured the investment in the H+ is well worth the price of admission unless you're a bottom feeder who gives their work away to the lowest bidder and will not recoup initial cost due to your poor business practices before something better comes down the road.

 

[oliver]

Exactly @Mickeyboo
it is possible that I repackage my H with an E50 or CG03 + with closed focal lens.
I just compare (photo) with a Panasonic GH5, it's superb. This is not the best camera in photo, but it has a 21 MB 4/3 sensor, and it is much heavier. In video against the GH5 flies away ...